Dixie Chicks "joke"

Darth Fanboy · Post by **Darth Fanboy** » 2003-04-07 08:19pm

Just watching CNN and apprently the Dixie Chicks are now claiming that thier statement about Bush was just a joke. I'd have been skeptical except it was a videotaped interview with them.

Of course i'd try and cop out too my my ablum sales were plunging like theirs are.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-04-07 08:30pm

Darth Fanboy wrote:Just watching CNN and apprently the Dixie Chicks are now claiming that thier statement about Bush was just a joke. I'd have been skeptical except it was a videotaped interview with them.

Of course i'd try and cop out too my my ablum sales were plunging like theirs are.

Maybe it was. Either way, too bad, actions have consequences.

aerius · Post by **aerius** » 2003-04-07 08:32pm

The should move to France and start a carreer under a new name.

Darth Fanboy · Post by **Darth Fanboy** » 2003-04-07 08:32pm

Either way it was entertaining to watch a celebrity voice their opinion and then feel backlash from expressing it, even if they didn't deserve it. Im such a malicious fuck sometimes.

theski · Post by **theski** » 2003-04-07 08:43pm

Here is a link to the story, BTW they did deserve the backlash, only because the fat one was stupid...http://launch.yahoo.com/read/news.asp?contentID=212895

Sam Or I · Post by **Sam Or I** » 2003-04-07 08:43pm

They deserved it, they should know who thier main market is. I mean come on with a name like "Dixie" you should know who your audience is.

theski · Post by **theski** » 2003-04-07 08:47pm

Also they fear for their safety

http://launch.yahoo.com/read/news.asp?contentID=212904

Sam Or I · Post by **Sam Or I** » 2003-04-07 08:53pm

In my personal opinion, retracting a statement only makes it worse. If you have the balls to stick by it, at least then you are respectable and have convictions other than money.

Darth Fanboy · Post by **Darth Fanboy** » 2003-04-07 08:56pm

Maines's comment has also taken its toll on the Dixie Chicks' album sales, which have dropped a reported 52 percent. Despite the dip in sales, the group remains the top-selling country act, with their album Home firmly entrenched in the Number One spot on the Billboard Top Country Albums chart

Country Music's decline is quite evident, if the top act drops 52% like that and is still the top act.

Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi · Post by **Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi** » 2003-04-07 09:08pm

Sam Or I wrote:They deserved it, they should know who thier main market is. I mean come on with a name like "Dixie" you should know who your audience is.

I do agree it was stupid of them to say it, but the backlash was uncalled for. A slip of the toungue shoudn't get you boycotts everywhere. I'm sure if it was any worse, they'd be burning their CDs in a big bonfire.

Also, the boycotters were generalizing, big time. We only heard the opinion of one of the Dixie Chicks, and the typical Dixie Chick may not share that opinion.

Burak Gazan · Post by **Burak Gazan** » 2003-04-07 11:11pm

Welcome to the real world of hard knocks and consequences. They can do and say pretty much what they like, but dont cry about it when the consumer responds by giving them the large index finger

Post by **Steve** » 2003-04-07 11:12pm

The boycott was immature. They're artists. I don't care what their opinions are, I like some of their music and I'd continue listening to it, no matter what some stupid redneck thinks.

While I support Bush on certain issues, I don't think him to be above criticism (although one could argue that criticism was unneeded), and I certainly don't think it mature to boycott them for it.

Boy.... bet that surprised a bunch of people who would mistake me for another gung-ho superpatriot type.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-04-07 11:17pm

Steve wrote:The boycott was immature. They're artists. I don't care what their opinions are, I like some of their music and I'd continue listening to it, no matter what some stupid redneck thinks.

Ideologically coercive boycotts seem to be the latest fad among the jingoists, and it's really fucking annoying.

Boy.... bet that surprised a bunch of people who would mistake me for another gung-ho superpatriot type.

There's nothing unpatriotic about what you just said; Thomas Jefferson would have agreed with you, I'm sure. Of course, I make sure to draw a sharp distinction between patriotism and jingoism.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-04-07 11:19pm

Darth Wong wrote:
Steve wrote:The boycott was immature. They're artists. I don't care what their opinions are, I like some of their music and I'd continue listening to it, no matter what some stupid redneck thinks.
Ideologically coercive boycotts seem to be the latest fad among the jingoists, and it's really fucking annoying.

They have a right to make their pleasure or displeasure felt. Freedom doesn't mean consequence free.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-04-07 11:21pm

Stormbringer wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:Ideologically coercive boycotts seem to be the latest fad among the jingoists, and it's really fucking annoying.
They have a right to make their pleasure or displeasure felt. Freedom doesn't mean consequence free.

There is a difference between criticism (expressing displeasure) and boycotts (attempting to punish those who hold different opinions by causing them material loss).

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-04-07 11:25pm

Darth Wong wrote:There is a difference between criticism (expressing displeasure) and boycotts (attempting to punish those who hold different opinions by causing them material loss).

Not that much. There's nothing to say they have to buy those products. It's a way of expressing their displeasure and you might not like it but it's their right to do it and there's nothing morally wrong with it.

Would you buy a Good CD from racist, fundamentalist, nazi?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-04-07 11:27pm

Stormbringer wrote:Not that much. There's nothing to say they have to buy those products. It's a way of expressing their displeasure and you might not like it but it's their right to do it and there's nothing morally wrong with it.

Yes, everyone has the right to be an asshole. Doesn't mean they're not assholes.

Would you buy a Good CD from racist, fundamentalist, nazi?

Comparing the Dixie Chicks to Nazis is ridiculous and you know it.

Montcalm · Post by **Montcalm** » 2003-04-07 11:28pm

Steve wrote:The boycott was immature. They're artists. I don't care what their opinions are, I like some of their music and I'd continue listening to it, no matter what some stupid redneck thinks.

While I support Bush on certain issues, I don't think him to be above criticism (although one could argue that criticism was unneeded), and I certainly don't think it mature to boycott them for it.

Boy.... bet that surprised a bunch of people who would mistake me for another gung-ho superpatriot type.

Its imature to boycott Artists,then its just as dumb for some idiotic Americans to boycott Canadian goods and businesses,or even not to sell us things on ebay or other online services.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-04-07 11:29pm

Yes, everyone has the right to be an asshole. Doesn't mean they're not assholes.

They're supporting their own goals. That doesn't make them assholes. They don't have to buy their products you know.

Comparing the Dixie Chicks to Nazis is ridiculous and you know it.

It's hyperbole but the principle is the same. You don't have to by from people you don't like.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-04-07 11:31pm

The Dixie Chicks made a horrible business decision and now they are reaping the consequences. There is no justice like that which a market economy inflicts on those who make poor decisions. It's quick, brutal, and merciless.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-04-07 11:31pm

Stormbringer wrote:
Yes, everyone has the right to be an asshole. Doesn't mean they're not assholes.
They're supporting their own goals. That doesn't make them assholes. They don't have to buy their products you know.

Yes it does, because their "goals" are the elimination of ideological impurity. I dislike Bono, but that doesn't mean I have to hate all U2's music or boycott them.

Comparing the Dixie Chicks to Nazis is ridiculous and you know it.
It's hyperbole but the principle is the same. You don't have to by from people you don't like.

Wrong. The Dixie Chicks have not demonstrated any kind of immorality; they only dislike George Bush. There is a difference between mere disagreement and being EVIL (like the Nazis), and what you are saying is that being ashamed of George Bush makes them EVIL, hence it is the same principle as boycotting white supremacists or Nazis.

That is EXACTLY the problem we're seeing with ideological polarization in political discourse today; people who fucking think that those with the opposite opinion are not just wrong; they're EVIL. And they treat them accordingly.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-04-07 11:32pm

Durran Korr wrote:The Dixie Chicks made a horrible business decision and now they are reaping the consequences. There is no justice like that which a market economy inflicts on those who make poor decisions. It's quick, brutal, and merciless.

Thank you for that tautology which does not even attempt to address the moral issues involved with ideological coercion.

Keevan_Colton · Post by **Keevan_Colton** » 2003-04-07 11:34pm

To quote homer simpson on the rules of life....
"Never say anything unless your sure everyone agrees with you."

I'm with Mike on this one....

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-04-07 11:36pm

Yes it does, because their "goals" are the elimination of ideological impurity. I dislike Bono, but that doesn't mean I have to hate all U2's music or boycott them.

It's not about eliminating discourse. It's about expressing your own veiws in a tangible way.

Wrong. The Dixie Chicks have not demonstrated any kind of immorality; they only dislike George Bush. There is a difference between mere disagreement and being EVIL (like the Nazis), and what you are saying is that being ashamed of George Bush makes them EVIL, hence it is the same principle as boycotting white supremacists or Nazis.

That is EXACTLY the problem we're seeing with ideological polarization in political discourse today; people who fucking think that those with the opposite opinion are not just wrong; they're EVIL. And they treat them accordingly.

Since when does it have to be evil to disagree with it? I mean seriously, why should they support people who they disagree with?

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-04-07 11:36pm

Ideological coercion? You mean the phenomenon that people are going to want to do business with those they approve of? I don't like it, but that's how things work. Life is not fair.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Dixie Chicks "joke"

Dixie Chicks "joke"

Re: Dixie Chicks "joke"